I agree with Andy. Replacing Maliki isn’t a solution to Iraq’s problems, just a soundbite for Dems and squishy Republicans in need of an instant policy prescription. And to demand a “truly national government” is to deny the country the possibility of normal politics, which after all, in America and Britain and India and Slovenia and St Lucia, presupposes that there will be winners and losers. Any artificially imposed “national government” will be even more susceptible to manipulation and destabilization by outside parties, and rather less responsive to the political realities in Iraq.

Andy is also quite right to point out that this approach gets political development absolutely upside down. The best hope for Iraq is a minimalist central government with strong autonomous regions and functioning local governments. There are already huge variations in political advance among Iraq’s provinces, and at the local level, too. The success stories deserve to be left to get on with it. Functioning democracies are built from the ground up, and a functioning national government is often the last piece of the puzzle.